You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 164 No. 14, July 26, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Special Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (19)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letter
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Health Policy
 •Law and Medicine
 •End-of-life Care/ Palliative Medicine
 •Patient-Physician Relationship, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Resuscitating Advance Directives

Bernard Lo, MD; Robert Steinbrook, MD

Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:1501-1506.

Advance directives have not fulfilled their promise of facilitating decisions about end-of-life care for incompetent patients. Many legal requirements and restrictions concerning advance directives are counterproductive. Requirements for witnessing or notarizing advance directives make it difficult for patients to complete a written directive during a physician visit. State laws that establish a hierarchy of family surrogates for incompetent patients who have not appointed a proxy are inflexible and may not apply to common clinical situations. Advance directives would be more useful if they emphasized discussing end-of-life care with physicians rather than completing a legal document. State laws should be revised to encourage patients to discuss advance directives with physicians and to complete them during an office visit. Such patient-physician discussions about end-of-life care can lead to more informed patient decisions. Procedures for written advance directives should be simplified. Patients should be able to designate health care proxies through oral statements to physicians. These reforms will encourage discussions between patients and physicians about advance directives and may lead to more informed decisions near the end of life.


From the Program in Medical Ethics and the Division of General Internal Medicine, the University of California, San Francisco (Dr Lo), and New England Journal of Medicine (Dr Steinbrook). The authors have no relevant financial interest in this article.


RELATED LETTER

Unreimbursed Services in Primary Care
Christine Sinsky
Arch Intern Med. 2005;165(6):702-703.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

End-of-Life Decisions: Family Views on Advance Directives
Bernal et al.
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2007;24:300-307.
ABSTRACT  

Controlling Death: The False Promise of Advance Directives
Perkins
ANN INTERN MED 2007;147:51-57.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Effect of Underlying Health Status on Patient or Surrogate Preferences for End-of-Life Care: A Pilot Study
Kara Zivin Bambauer and Gillick
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2007;24:185-190.
ABSTRACT  

The State of Advance Care Planning: One Decade After SUPPORT
Collins et al.
AM J HOSP PALLIAT CARE 2006;23:378-384.
ABSTRACT  

Superseding Psychiatric Advance Directives: Ethical and Legal Considerations
Swanson et al.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2006;34:385-394.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Living wills and the Mental Capacity Act: a postal questionnaire survey of UK geriatricians
Schiff et al.
Age Ageing 2006;35:116-121.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Beyond Advance Directives: Importance of Communication Skills at the End of Life
Tulsky
JAMA 2005;294:359-365.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Unreimbursed Services in Primary Care
Sinsky
Arch Intern Med 2005;165:702-703.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2004 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.